4 ms·
Problems with user created content sites are all the same: The default license is always that the user grants only the site they post to the ability to host th
by throwaway13337 7y ago
Problems with user created content sites are all the same:
The default license is always that the user grants only the site they post to the ability to host the content.
It would be nice if the default, by law, was that user created content posted publicly was available for re-hosting. Otherwise, the company would have to ensure the user understands that they are gifting the company future control in a specific way.
The result of the current climate is that these companies go against who gave them their power and because of their content arsonal are immune to reprisal.
With a default public license enforced by law, we'd see so much more innovation and cooperation of content hosts. The balance of power between content creator and platform would shift.
This would essentially solve most problems with Facebook, reddit, stackoverflow, linkedin, and more all at the same times. They'd have to try harder to do right by their users or risk losing them to a competing platform with the same data.
- fabian2k 7y agoContent on Stack Overflow is CC-licensed, so anyone can host it somewhere else, if they want to.
- throwaway13337 7y agoI didn't realize. Well then it's a terrific solution for upset moderators. Take their ball and go compete.
- pinche2 7y agoActually, anyone can download their entire [anonymized] database (or select only some sites) from Archive.org via torrent or directly: https://archive.org/details/stackexchange https://archive.org/details/stackexchange
- pbhjpbhj 7y agoI thought content there was cc-by, how then is it anonymised?
- pinche2 7y agoGood question, I have wondered about this myself. Also because after I deleted my account all of my 2000+ answers are now attributed some user012345, not my username. Seem they do whatever they want with the license. They just changed it from v3 to v4 of the cc by-sa with attribution required and without mine and many other's permission...
- icebraining 7y agoThe law lets you do that, but Google doesn't look kindly on sites that are 99% copies of others, mostly because spammers do that a lot.
- pjc50 7y agoThe content is not the only valuable thing. The community is. And communities are hard to move. If, tomorrow, some angry internet god partitioned things so that the disappointed moderators left and set up the old database at a new URL, and at the same time wiped the original sites, the original sites would still likely be most popular this time next year.